Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

"With you"

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
http://www.avweb.com/news/sayagain/192912-1.html

That one talks about phraseology, but we have bigger problems to worry about these days. I'd call myself a pretty standard radio operator, but it's funny to me how some people get their panties all riled up about a few words extra.


After a perusal of the correct article, it turns out that I'm a pretty "standard" radio guy as well. The difference is I am "standard" because I just feel like its easier and more efficient. I get the feeling that other people are "standard" because they actually get a thrill out of being sticklers about things. There's a world of difference between a guy like me and a guy like them.

And if someone doesn't keep it exactly how the AIM says it, I'm not going to freak out. Nobody should freak out.

See yaaaa!

P.S. Just for the record, the guys that are the worst with phraseology, IMO, are the mainline airline guys. Everyone else seems to do pretty well.

P.P.S. But it's nothing I'm going to freak about.
 
Professional pilots sound like student pilots when they use "with you" in their initial transmissions to ATC. Here's a clue -- ATC knows you are "with them" by the fact you are talking to them! It's redundant and a waste of radio time....especially the stupid "checking in with you". Try dropping the "with you" crap and sound a bit more professional and like you've flown in other parts of the world. Next time you hear "with you" consider how stupid it sounds....and is. It's just a bad habit.

Also...drop the "Any chance..." when what you really meant to do is request something. i.e. "Comair 123 requesting direct xyz".

Jag. Have fun going 80 times the speed of sound, "Mach 80".
 
Tell ya what Mach, and I think I speak for us all. Next time any of us wants to hear something from an a**hole, I'll just fart.
 
You're just a 'doosh' for deviating from the Pilot/Controller glossary and jeopardizing the safety of yourself, your passengers, and everyone else in the airspace around you.

If you're going to be up in arms about accuracy and such things, you should pick up a dictionary. It's d0uche, not doosh. Glass houses and all that crap!
 
I can live with "With You", However, PLEASE don't call 16,000 "Flight Level 160" or don't call FL280 "Twenty Eight Thousand"
 
Hello center.

Just checkin in with you after over a year of thread inactivity.

Isnt resurrection a beautiful thing?

see,
YAAAAAAAAAAAA
 
Hello center.

Just checkin in with you after over a year of thread inactivity.

Isnt resurrection a beautiful thing?

see,
YAAAAAAAAAAAA

Do a search on "with you"? This guy started a "new" thread back in June that is exactly like this old thread. It gets confusing on which thread is the "new" thread. :D
 
One situation where saying 'with you' to ATC is acceptable is after center tells you to 'change to my frequency xxx.xx'. "Anal Air ABC with you on xxx.xx"

Using proper frequency, altitude, speed and heading pronounciation is much more important than using a second to throw in a mild salutation such as 'with you' or 'checking in'.
 
You are the one trying to argue with the AIM. But I guess if all the guys at the majors do it, that makes it professional.
I can see why people shorten or substitute phrases to save time. Four point six vs four thousand six hundred is a great example. I do it too from time to time. Thats not the topic of this thread.

Continue viewing the AIM as optional and it will eventually bite you in the ass.
Sounds like you view it as optional.

The point is not whether these phrases are normal or common.
Actually that is the exact point I’m trying to make.

I wish phraseology was part of checkrides. Theres countless accidents/incidents were standard phraseology was not used.
Sounds like you’re reaching, find one accident that that was caused by someone using “with you”, or “4.6”. You can’t. There is no such accident. Quit trying to be dramatic.

The point is that all these things are written in the AIM for a reason. Safety. Take shortcuts for speed, or to "sound professional" (even though you sound completely opposite) and there will eventually be a miscommunication. With enough miscommunication you will eventually have an accident.
I can see why people shorten or substitute phrases to save time. Four point six vs four thousand six hundred is a great example. I do it too from time to time. Thats not the topic of this thread.

You’re just a big hypocrite.

I'm proud to have attended ERAU.
enough said
 
Everyone has flown with an a$$ clown like this guy. The funny thing is, these guys usually do more stupid sh!t themselves than laid back captains. I love it when they float down the runway 3,000 feet and then I just throw it their face about how they need to work on landing the airplane a little better!
 
Everyone has flown with an a$$ clown like this guy. The funny thing is, these guys usually do more stupid sh!t themselves than laid back captains. I love it when they float down the runway 3,000 feet and then I just throw it their face about how they need to work on landing the airplane a little better!

Like this guy…..

I just dont want you running into my airplane because you turned to 240 instead of climbing to FL240. Or blocked a controller for 10 seconds 3 times while you're howdying and withyaing and ahhhhhing him to death and he couldnt move someone out of the way and got a deal.
Its a big deal, and it will eventually cause an incident/accident.
 
Last edited:
I usually check'n on center saying: BREAK'R 23.45, BREAK'R 23.45 THIS HERE'S ABC123 YOU GOT YOUR EARS ON. WE'RE LEVEL 350, PUSH'N HARD, NEGATIVE ON THE TURBULENCE..OVER'N OUT. It always works.
 
uhhmmmm and abc123 is uhmmmm with you descending uhhmmmm 15.2 for 11 and 240 on the uhhmmm lubber. we have uhhmmm echo echo echo and 30.13 in the uhhmmm kolzman window
 
Actually I am. My F/Os laugh at all the stupid stuff I point out that people do and most of them say they never thought of it ..........and that I was right.


I flew with you. If you noticed, as soon as I said you were right, I turned to look out the window (while I rolled my eyes). If this is what causes you irritation in this industry, then you either have it very well, or you haven't a clue. Are you 'with me' or do I need to break it down for you?
 
I usually check'n on center saying: BREAK'R 23.45, BREAK'R 23.45 THIS HERE'S ABC123 YOU GOT YOUR EARS ON. WE'RE LEVEL 350, PUSH'N HARD, NEGATIVE ON THE TURBULENCE..OVER'N OUT. It always works.

Ironically, most OSU "Buckeye" fans talk that same way on a daily basis over their CB's as they drive their "big rig" down the interstate.

That's a tribute to the late, great Bob Ufer (former Michigan football announcer) who used to always say, "The Horseshoe is filled with 90,000 drunk truck drivers today" everytime Michigan would play OSU in Columbus. Sadly, it's not far from the truth.
 
uhhmmmm and abc123 is uhmmmm with you descending uhhmmmm 15.2 for 11 and 240 on the uhhmmm lubber. we have uhhmmm echo echo echo and 30.13 in the uhhmmm kolzman window

ABC 123 that is the Kilo Oscar Lima Lima Sierra Mike Alpha November window.
 
Ya, CAL guy definitely not having his day there I guess...

FD
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom